Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 27-45-5 (2026)

Deposit of redemption funds; disposition

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

It shall be the duty of the chancery clerk of each county in the state to immediately deposit in the county depository of his county all sums of money paid to him by any person for the redemption of land sold for taxes in his county; all such funds are hereby declared to be public funds, and shall be secured by the county depository, as other public funds are required to be secured by law. The board of supervisors of each county shall provide the clerk with printed checks in the form of vouchers, with proper blanks, bound in book form with a sufficient blank margin to be used in drawing redemption funds out of the county depository; all such checks shall be numbered in numerical order, and it shall be the duty of the clerk to draw on such funds upon such checks as herein provided in payment of all amounts due the officers and purchasers out of said funds. He shall first pay the officers entitled to their costs, fees, and damages which are allowed to said officers by law; and he shall then pay to the purchasers at any such tax sale, the full amount due him as provided by law. It shall be the duty of the state auditor of public accounts to audit such account of each clerk, as other public funds are audited; and he shall include in said audit a special report to the board of supervisors of his county setting out in detail the amounts collected, and the disposition of such funds, and the balance on hand, and attest to the correctness thereof.

If such clerk shall neglect, refuse or fail to deposit such funds received by him as herein provided, he shall be guilty of misfeasance in office, and in addition thereto shall be liable on his official bond to any person injured by his failure to deposit such funds in the county depository as herein provided.

Codes, 1942, § 9949; Laws, 1940, ch 303.

Brought forward by Laws, 2021, ch. 370, SB 2643,§ 2, eff. 7/1/2021.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1979–2020 · leading case: Booneville Collision Repair, Inc. v. City of Booneville, Mississippi, 152 So. 3d 265 (Miss. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Booneville Collision Repair, Inc. v. City of Booneville, Mississippi, 152 So. 3d 265 (Miss. 2014). · cites it 16× “Miss. Code Ann. § 27-45-5 (Rev. 2010). The Court of Appeals found that the suit under Section 27-45-5 was “a claim that a public official failed to comply with one of his statutory 13 duties, namely, to pay a debt owed by operation of the tax sale statutes and specifically those…”

Newton Cnty. v. State ex rel. Dukes, 133 So. 3d 819 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 12× “However, we also held that the MTCA did not govern the purchasers’ claims that the chancery clerk had failed to comply with his statutory duty under Mississippi Code Annotated section 27-45-5 (Rev.2002) to reimburse the purchasers after the prior owner redeemed the property that…”

Clement v. RL Burns Corp., 373 So. 2d 790 (Miss. 1979). · cites it 2× “That section and section 27-45-5 make provisions of disbursement of monies paid in redemption and report thereof, and appellants have come forward with little and speculative information that would exist on the completion of the redemption disbursement, settlement, and report…”

Alexander v. Taylor, 928 So. 2d 992 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Miss.Code Ann. § 27-45-5 (Rev.2002). On the evidence presently, no reimbursement occurred for the payments Alexander and Newsome made for 1994 taxes on the property they bought due to unpaid 1993 taxes.”

Dennis Short & Sammye M. Short v. Bolivar Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, Eddie Andrew Williams III, Donny Whitten, Preston Billings, James McBride, & Larry L. King, Individually & in their Off. Capacity as Supervisors of Bolivar Cnty., Mississippi (Miss. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “Miss. Code Ann. § 27-45-5 (Rev. 2017). ¶27.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.